Difelice v Dettmer

[2021] FCA 631

FEDERAL COURT OF AUSTRALIA

Difelice v Dettmer [2021] FCA 631  

File number:

VID 268 of 2021

Judgment of:

SNADEN J

Date of judgment:

10 June 2021

Catchwords:

INDUSTRIAL LAW – applicant holds office as assistant state secretary of a well-known trade union – misconduct charges brought against applicant seeking his removal from office – charges proposed to be determined by the union’s National Council – procedures set in train by resolutions made on 6 May 2021 – whether National Council resolutions are beyond the power conferred on that body by the union’s rules – whether the National Council meeting at which procedures were decided was validly convened – whether National Council has power to determine whether a “State Official” should be removed from office

PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – application for interlocutory relief under s 164(4) of the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Cth) – appropriateness of directions for the observance of union rules – application for interlocutory relief granted

Legislation:

Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Act 2009 (Cth) – ss 164 and 329

Cases cited:

Briant v Martin [2020] FCA 1009

Division:

Fair Work Division

Registry:

Victoria

National Practice Area:

Employment and Industrial Relations

Number of paragraphs:

44

Date of hearing:

9 June 2021

Counsel for the Applicant:

Mr M Harding SC with Mr T Borgeest

Solicitor for the Applicant:

Gordon Legal

Counsel for the First, Second, Third, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Nineth, Tenth, Eleventh, Twelfth, Thirteenth, Sixteenth, Seventeenth, Eighteenth, Twenty-first, Twenty-second, Twenty-fourth, Twenty-fifth, Twenty-sixth, Twenty-eighth, Thirtieth, Thirty-second, Thirty-fifth, Thirty-sixth, Thirty-seventh, Thirty-eighth, Fortieth, Forty-first, Forty-second and Forty-third Respondents:

Mr S Crawshaw SC

Solicitor for the First, Second, Third, Sixth, Seventh, Eighth, Nineth, Tenth, Eleventh, Twelfth, Thirteenth, Sixteenth, Seventeenth, Eighteenth, Twenty-first, Twenty-second, Twenty-fourth, Twenty-fifth, Twenty-sixth, Twenty-eighth, Thirtieth, Thirty-second, Thirty-fifth, Thirty-sixth, Thirty-seventh, Thirty-eighth, Fortieth, Forty-first, Forty-second and Forty-third Respondents:

Taylor & Scott Lawyers

Counsel for the Fourth, Fifth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth, Nineteenth, Twentieth, Twenty-third, Twenty-seventh, Twenty-nineth, Thirty-first, Thirty-third, Thirty-fourth and Thirty-nineth Respondents:

Did not appear

Solicitor for the Intervener:

Mr D Taylor of Segelov Taylor Lawyers

ORDERS

VID 268 of 2021

BETWEEN:

PAUL DIFELICE

Applicant

AND:

ANDREW DETTMER

First Respondent

ANN-MARIE ALLAN

Second Respondent

PETER BAUER (and others named in the Schedule)

Third Respondent

PAUL BASTIAN

Intervener

ORDER MADE BY:	SNADEN J
DATE OF ORDER:	10 JUNE 2021

THE COURT ORDERS THAT:

1.For the purposes of these orders:

(a)the “6 May Resolutions” means the resolutions purportedly carried and adopted by the respondents on 6 May 2021 during their purported meeting as the National Council of the Union;

(b)the “Defelice Affidavit” means the affidavit affirmed herein by the applicant on 18 May 2021;

(c)“FCRs” means the Federal Court Rules 2011 (Cth);

(d)“Resolution 3” means the resolution that forms part of the 6 May Resolutions and that is headed “resolution 3”; and

(e)“Union” means the Automotive, Food, Metals, Engineering, Printing and Kindred Industries Union.

2.Pursuant to r 9.12 of the FCRs, Mr Paul Bastian have leave to intervene in the proceeding.

3.Pursuant to r 10.24 of…